An alternative argument for why women leave STEM • Hacker News Board

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#191

Post by yjftsjthsd-h » Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 9:23 PM UTC

thrower123 wrote: post #185

thereisnospork wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SWE's are a tiny slice of 'STEM' and by far the most profitable. How much do you think the average phd in biology makes? maybe 30k/y till 27, then 45k/y till 30, then followed by 75-90?

This is why I have a bit of an aneurysm whenever all of these wildly disparate things are lumped together under the umbrella of "STEM". Notably, we keep medicine in the acronym, but in almost all discussions, doctors and nurses and everything else that would fit under that heading are forked out already. - Edit: derp, it's Math, not medicine, but there's an indication of how brain-rotted I've gotten trying to follow…

I thought the M was maths and medicine wasn't in STEM?

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#192

Post by naiveprogrammer » Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 9:23 PM UTC

detoxdetox wrote: post #79

entee wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with this and the subtlety of the OP’s argument. There is clearly a problem, there are clearly many contributors, I have personally seen The OP situation play out with my female friends/colleagues in STEM (and other “high power” sectors). This does NOT discount that sexism still is a problem nor that there may be cultural/societal norms that influence the family planning issue. It’s a complicated issue, it ne…

Lost in the modern rush for status and money, "obscenely convenient high quality daycare" used to be called "Motherhood" and was supplied by Mothers themselves. Some would argue, the most valuable contribution to society, even if not directly monetized. To sustain a healthy population, we used to need 10 children per fertile woman, which made "stay at home Mother" an obvious necessity for the vast majority of women.…

There is certainly something to be said about the way stay-at-home mothers are perceived by many in our society. They provide one of the most valuable contributions to society and should be praised. The issue is: many females take this issue at a personal level. Being a stay-at-home mom is a choice and most people don't look down on women who choose a different path. Also, some women can't simply cope with the fact that they have a biological clock and their careers may be on the way to their motherhood (or vice-versa). I wish there were more honest conversations about this.

Males also should equally share the burden here I must say, as more and more of us run away from life responsibilities. The 30 year old basement dweller meme is real.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#193

Post by mschuster91 » Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 9:23 PM UTC

balls187 wrote: post #72

My note to the author, enjoy your career. If and when you feel ready to start a family, you will. And if it doesn't happen, you'll be okay too. Maternal Age seems like a boogie man story to scare women. Perhaps STEM women who are early career (24-28) would benefit from meeting mothers (both who are in STEM and not in STEM careers) who had children at age 35+. > ...Women who stay in academia expect to marry later, and…

> Maternal Age seems like a boogie man story to scare women

Actually not. It's not just the genetics / pregnancy problems that are proven to significantly rise with age... but also that the time of menopause can neither be forecast nor the effects reversed (some hit it with 40, some with 60!), so there is a significant disadvantage (=no kids at all) for waiting too long.

Additionally: do you want to deal with a baby when you're 25 or when you are 40 or, worse, 50, that keeps you awake all night? It's a massive toll on your physical and especially mental health - the younger you are the better you cope. And your kids will be happier to have a dad/mom who can actually do things with you when they're 15-25 years...

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#194

Post by YeGoblynQueenne » Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 9:24 PM UTC

blub wrote: post #186

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nature and sexual selection have nothing to do with it. A complete lack of societal support for women who want to have children and maintain a career in STEM academia (or similar) is all there is to it. >> Many fathers would very much prefer to spend time with their families, but can't because they're expected to first and foremost provide for them. Why do the fathers "have to provide"? Why is it so difficult for a m…

Society is supporting women who raise children and men who provide. This worked quite fine for the history of human civilization, but it's painful for women that want to build careers and men who want to be with their families. First of all, there are very many people that are content with that situation. There is no easy solution for those that aren't, because nature does play a huge part and those 9 months and at l…

The father can't provide emotional and physical support in the first year of life of a child? Why? What is it that a father can't do during the first year of a child's life, other than breastfeed it, that the mother can?

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#195

Post by commandlinefan » Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 9:24 PM UTC

balls187 wrote: post #72

My note to the author, enjoy your career. If and when you feel ready to start a family, you will. And if it doesn't happen, you'll be okay too. Maternal Age seems like a boogie man story to scare women. Perhaps STEM women who are early career (24-28) would benefit from meeting mothers (both who are in STEM and not in STEM careers) who had children at age 35+. > ...Women who stay in academia expect to marry later, and…

> I gladly set aside my career to raise my kids.

You’re going to need some money when they get to be old enough to go to college.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#196

Post by lordnacho » Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 9:24 PM UTC

One thing that she touched on that I've thought a lot about recently is the age at which we have kids. My father passed away a couple of weeks ago, and I compare him to his brother. My uncle had his first kid 10 years younger than my dad, and he ended up with the fourth one being older than me. He's got 10 grandchildren, the oldest of which is an adult now. My dad's grandchildren will never know him in any real way.

Since the funeral I've thought about this a lot. Our later-life relationships will be affected by the age at which we had kids. I'm sure this is in the minds of a lot of people in this economic age. There's a lot of "investing in your career" where the equation doesn't account for this.

I wish we could have an economy where this was easier. Say you could have your kids early, in your 20s, yet still progress your career. Perhaps pay for it with working to an older age, which should be possible with some improved health outcomes. Along with a flexible education system that allowed you come in and out. And perhaps incentives for firms to let people in and out, instead of the constant career grind that requires people to constantly push. Some of the finance and legal tracks seem to be for people who are expected to die at 45, like some weird victorian dystopia.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#197

Post by slumdev » Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 9:24 PM UTC

hinkley wrote: post #183

slumdev wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And one of the consequences of this is that I'm not confident that if I show up to interview at a startup that I'm going to exhibit the degree of 'passion' they're looking for. This is good, though. If you faked the passion, you might wind up surrounded by lunatics who actually believe their iOS app is going to save the world. Also, this "passion", most of the time, is just a word that has been co-opted by the owne…

Yeah, I had that pattern in mind as I was choosing my phrasing. Coworkers know that they can come to me and say, "hey dude, your code is busted and 4 people can't get work done," I'll drop everything and fix it if I can't give you a workaround (and it'll bug me until I do fix it). I like that passion in others. I get into a little trouble when that passion is about completely fixable things that are dragging down pro…

It sounds like your priorities are in order.

My passion rears its ugly head when my team is asked to take shortcuts and ship garbage to meet deadlines. It also comes out when we're asked to implement half-baked ideas without having the chance to meet and question the ideators and refine those ideas into something workable.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#198

Post by hackinthebochs » Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 9:24 PM UTC

abathur wrote: post #161

hackinthebochs wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>How is that not sexist? How is that not the sexism that's keeping women from advancing their careers in STEM academia? Why should the academy structure itself so that women who choose to put their attention into their families do not have a career impact? If academic positions are necessarily zero-sum, it seems impossible to correct for this without seriously unfair negative externalities? How is it that the biases…

Maybe it helps if I knock the particulars out of your case: Why should structure itself ? Do you have some clear argument for why members of an organization aren't entitled to participate in shaping it?

I don't see how my point served to excluded a member of the academy weighing in. Note that my question was specific in the context of a zero-sum industry. I'm happy to see reasoned arguments that address this point.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#199

Post by sokoloff » Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 9:25 PM UTC

thrower123 wrote: post #185

thereisnospork wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SWE's are a tiny slice of 'STEM' and by far the most profitable. How much do you think the average phd in biology makes? maybe 30k/y till 27, then 45k/y till 30, then followed by 75-90?

This is why I have a bit of an aneurysm whenever all of these wildly disparate things are lumped together under the umbrella of "STEM". Notably, we keep medicine in the acronym, but in almost all discussions, doctors and nurses and everything else that would fit under that heading are forked out already. - Edit: derp, it's Math, not medicine, but there's an indication of how brain-rotted I've gotten trying to follow…

> Notably, we keep medicine in the acronym

I believe the "M" in STEM is Mathematics, not Medicine.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#200

Post by scarmig » Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 9:26 PM UTC

One tactical approach: a high achieving woman could prioritize finding a partner who is interested in deprioritizing his own career for the sake of supporting her and raising children. This is a strategy high achieving men have used for a long time.

So, pursue men involved in "child friendly" careers. Nurses instead of doctors; teacher aides over academics; tax preparers over management consultants. Or even men who are passionate about the idea of being a stay at home dad.